Topic: Task 2: It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct (e.g. dinosaur, dodo…) There is no reason why people should try to prevent this from happening. To what extent do you agree or disagree?


It is said that people do not have to suppress the process of animal extinction like dinosaur or dodo since it is considered as nature. For me, I strongly argue the toss.


At first, I believe that by protecting animals, students can see those species not only through pictures but also in real life. They can also observe and study about the animal's features or habitats or at first hand. Thereby, they understand thoroughly about those species. For examples, Oxford's university has pointed out that about 57% of students found it extremely interesting in watching the animal directly when they were taught about those species. Thus, it is very essential for people to prevent animals from the verge of extinction.


Secondly, animals play an important role in tourism. As we know, zoos and national parks can make a profit from rare animals. It is can not be denied that a lot of tourists are attracted by the animals. This can also lead to the development of the areas. For instance, according to the survey in 2007 of Vietnam, the Thu Le zoo welcomed over 60,000 tourists each year. This made Ha Noi become one of the wealthiest cities in this country. Therefore, it stands out that people have to intervene in the extinction of species.


To conclude, I oppose the idea that people do not need to prevent the extinction of animals as those species help us not only with education but also with tourism.

Thanks for reading my essay ^-^

Linh Linh 1953 It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct (e.g. dinosaur, dodo…)

In my opinion, this statement is false.

The non-avian dinosaurs, along with three-quarters of the extant species on earth, terrestrial and marine, were all extinguished 66 million years ago with a small asteroid crashed into the earth and caused a disastrous climate change. There have been five mass extinctions in the past 500 million years.

More recently, in the past 125 thousand years, all large animals, especially mammals, but also turtles and birds, were killed off by human hunters. As homo sapiens migrated into a new area, the large animals which could be hunted for food were wiped out.

It is said that (Please do not use these ugly dummy-it passive clauses. They add nothing to the essay. ) People do not have to suppress the process of animal extinction (I do not understand this. Is it a requirement, like a governmental regulation, that people must not have feelings of killing all the animals?) like dinosaurs (I have not seen a brontosaurus, triceratops or T-Rex recently. They all died 66 million years ago.) or dodo (I have not seen any of these either. The last one was seen in 1662 on a small island.) since it is considered as nature. For me, I strongly argue the toss. (That makes no sense. The topic is not about playing dice.)


I do not believe that you understand the topic. Your first paragraph is not good English. The verb "suppress" is not good. e.g.

When fat people go on a diet to lose weight, they have to suppress their urge to eat. Sometimes a doctor prescribes appetite suppressants.

The topic is about taking actions to stop the human-caused extinctions of all kinds of life - plants, animals, insects and fish - that is happening today in the world. Or do nothing and allow all these life forms to disappear from the face of the earth.

Extinction does not just apply to large animals. Insects, birds, amphibians and tiny marine organisms are also threatened. All kinds of plants are also dying out and disappearing along with their insect pollinators.



At first, I believe that (Do not write opinions in the body paragraph. The opinion is in the first paragraph. The body paragraphs contain argument points supporting your opinion.) by protecting animals, students in the future will be able can see those species not only through pictures but also in real life. They can also observe and study about (It is "learn about X". Or "study X".) the animal's appearance features or habitats or at first hand. Thereby, they understand thoroughly about ("understand X. Not "understand about X") those species thoroughly. For examples, (wrong form) Oxford's university (wrong form. Oxford is a town in the UK. The university is named after the town. Also you have an incorrect subject. e.g A survey conducted by Oxford University...) has pointed out that about 57% of their biology or veterinary science students found it extremely interesting to watch in watching the animal directly when they were taught about those species. Thus, it is very essential for people to prevent animals from the verge of extinction.


Secondly, Second, animals play an important role in tourism. As we know, zoos and national parks can make a profit from having realistic habitats which are stocked with rare animals. It is can not be denied (ungrammatical. Avoid these dummy-it clauses) that A lot of tourists are attracted by seeing wild animals in their natural setting. This can also lead to the development of the areas. For instance, according to the a survey in 2007 of Vietnam, the Thu Le zoo welcomed over 60,000 tourists each year. This made Ha Noi become one of the wealthiest cities in the this country. Therefore, it stands out that there is a valid economic reason why people have to intervene in the extinction of species.


To conclude, I oppose the idea that people do not need to prevent the extinction of animals as those species help us not only with education but also with tourism.

Site Hint: Check out our list of pronunciation videos.

Topic: Task 2: It is a natural process for animal species to become extinct (e.g. dinosaur, dodo…) There is no reason why people should try to prevent this from happening. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Here is an example opening paragraph:

Environmentalists have been documenting the extinction of hundreds of species of plants and animals every year. In fact the rates have been accelerating, so they protest that governments must do something to stop it. Other people object, claiming that extinction is a natural process of evolution. But I completely disagree with them since the biodiversity is essential for human civilization to survive.

Thank you so much, I'll follow your sample